Tag Archives: rule of law

State news

Fight is far from finished

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick made his point with crystal clarity … which is that the fight among Texas Republicans is far from over in light of the acquittal of Attorney General Ken Paxton in his historic impeachment trial.

To be honest, I really shouldn’t give a rat’s backside of the looming GOP fight. I just fear it’s going to bring even more scorn to the state my wife and I chose to call home nearly 40 years ago.

Patrick, as president of the Texas Senate, presided over the AG’s trial and, to my thinking, did a credible job of staying out of the way. Then came the acquittal by 30 senators. That gave Patrick license, in his mind, to declare that the impeachment was a waste of time and money. It was nothing of the sort.

He blamed House Republicans — who voted overwhelmingly to join their Democratic colleagues to impeach Paxton — for what others have called a “kangaroo court” and a “sham.” The GOP controls both legislative chambers, so in Patrick’s view, most House members were “supposed” to join their Senate colleagues in giving Paxton a pass.

We are witnessing a Texas version of what is transpiring nationally with Republicans fighting among themselves, divided between those who are loyal to the rule of law and those who adhere to the doctrine of a political party.

It looks horrible at a national level … and it’s just as ugly as it plays out in Austin.

legal news

Keep your distance, Mr. POTUS

Joe Biden has issued a directive ordering White House staffers to maintain a vow of silence regarding the indictments surrounding his immediate predecessor as president of the United States.

The president did so as a show of respect for the isolation he honors between political matters and those involved with administering the rule of law.

Many Democrats want President Biden to speak out, to take the fight to the Republicans, to — in effect — ignore the isolation.

Wrong! That is a fool’s option.

It is clear that Biden’s predecessor never would honor such a principle. Indeed, he says if he’s elected (God forbid!) in 2024 that he’s going to appoint a special counsel to go after Hunter Biden, Joe Biden and possibly any other Democrat he considers a worthy target.

I will interject that the current special counsel, Jack Smith, was selected by Attorney General Merrick Garland, that the White House had no role in finding this individual. AG Garland felt the need to separate himself from the twin probes into the 1/6 assault on our government and the classified documents caper that has produced a 37-count indictment against the former POTUS.

I believe President Biden’s fealty to the rule of law must stand. He won’t offer personal comment on his predecessor’s plight. Nor should he.

Nor should the White House staff weigh in with cheap shots and innuendo. Let’s just allow the process to do its work … according to the United States Constitution, which all elected public officials take an oath to “defend and protect.”

As for the leading 2024 GOP pretender for the White House, let him yammer on. The more he says the deeper he seems to sink into an abyss from which he might not escape.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

legal news

It’s the ‘rule of law’

The “rule of law” has nearly become a cliche, given the frequency of its use by politicians on both sides of the great divide.

It is much more than that, of course. The rule of law needs to apply to every single citizen of this great country, even former presidents of the United States.

Thus, it is critical to view the indictment of Donald Trump on 34 counts relating to his hush-money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels as a victory for the rule of law.

Trump’s allies on the right wing of the Republican Party say that an ex-POTUS is above being prosecuted, that the Manhattan district attorney overstepped his authority by persuading the grand jury to indict Trump.

The translation of that, naturally, is that the rule of law doesn’t apply to an ex-POTUS.

Baloney! It damn sure does apply. Indeed, it must apply if the judicial system is going to work as the founders designed it. Either we cherish the system or we toss it aside.

I am going to cherish it with the hope that the rule of law will run its complete course.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Donald Trump, legal news

Rule of law set for challenge

Here it comes: We’re going to see, more than likely, a supreme test of the notion that “no one is above the law” that Attorney General Merrick Garland keeps reminding us.

The House select 1/6 committee has subpoenaed Donald J. Trump to talk to the committee about all he knows about what happened before, during and after the insurrection. Trump has issued a 14-page response that doesn’t way whether he will honor the summons and talk to the committee.

Congress could cite the ex-president of contempt of Congress. He could be indicted for that. Trump could go to trial. A jury could convict him … all of which happened to former Trump adviser/toadie Steve Bannon, who now is facing a two-year term in a federal prison.

Is Trump on the same plain as the rest of us? Must he face the consequence of prison time if he refuses honor the demands of a duly constituted congressional committee?

Merrick Garland says he must. I believe we are to learn in due course whether The Donald actually dodges this bullet.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news

‘Rule of law’ strikes

That darn “rule of law” keeps rearing its head in the 1/6 probe into the insurrection on Capitol Hill.

The latest target of the rule of law is former Donald Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro, who’s been slapped with a contempt of Congress indictment for failing to comply with a congressional subpoena demanding he talk to the 1/6 panel.

Don’t all those Trumpkins say they honor the rule of law, that no one is above it? Oh, wait! They also say the 1/6 committee examining the insurrection is not legally constituted. Of course, they are full of sh** when they say such a thing.

The House select panel chaired by Mississippi Democrat Bennie Thompson is charged with finding the whole truth behind the insurrection. Navarro was in the White House that day. He knows a lot of what went down as the crowd stormed Capitol Hill and threatened to kill the vice president.

Navarro is refusing to obey the rule of law. Therefore, the Department of Justice has indicted him.

I believe there will be a lot more indictments to come. They will demonstrate to everyone that the Trumpkins are just like their hero, the ex-POTUS. They’re all liars.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

national news, Uncategorized

Rule of law faces test

My fellow Americans, we are going to witness whether the “rule of law” means anything to members of Congress who have been summoned to appear before the House select committee examining the 1/6 insurrection.

The committee has subpoenaed five Republican congressman who were key allies to Donald J. Trump. The committee had asked them to appear voluntarily; they declined.

So, here come the lawful orders. House GOP leader Kevin McCarthy, along with GOP Reps. Scott Perry, Jim Jordan, Mo Brooks and Andy Biggs all have been ordered to appear before the committee.

So, which is it? Are these dedicated Trumpkins going to comply with the rule of law, which they have at one time or another during their congressional careers said they honor? Or are they going to take one for their cult leader, The Donald?

The rule of law is as straightforward as it gets. A legally constituted congressional committee has issued a lawful order for five House members to talk to its members. Failure to comply with a lawful order should result in criminal punishment. Indeed, such a consequence anyone in the military who refuses to obey a lawful order. Your commanding officer tells you to do something, and you refuse? It’s off to the stockade where you would await adjudication of your offense.

I don’t know whether any or all of them will refuse to comply with the subpoena. Whoever says “no” to the House committee should face the potential consequence. The rule of law should stand in this instance as it should stand in all cases.

Let us never forget that each of these individuals swore an oath to keep faith with the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution is on the side of the committee that has acted lawfully.

We well might learn whether these congressmen were sincere when they said they would uphold the Constitution and whether their stated fealty to almighty God was real or false.

johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

State news

Due process anyone? Anyone?

Hey, what happened to due process, the presumption of innocence, the, um, rule of law?

Ted Cruz, the Republican running for re-election to the U.S. Senate in Texas, fired off a real knee-slapper Tuesday night in response to a supporter yelling “Lock him up!” in reference to Democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke.

“Well, you know, there’s a double-occupancy cell with Hillary Clinton,” Cruz said. “Y’all are gonna get me in trouble with that,” he added at a campaign rally in Georgetown, Texas.

Doesn’t that just crack you up? That guy is hilarious, man!

Hillary Clinton was the object of GOP mobs yelling “Lock her up!” during the 2016 presidential campaign. They were just so darn angry over that email matter, Benghazi and other assorted fabricated crimes that they were ready to send her in shackles to the nearest — or farthest — penitentiary possible.

Now it’s Beto O’Rourke feeling the Republicans’ burn as he campaigns against the Cruz Missile.

I am unaware of anything in O’Rourke’s history that would prompt such a ridiculous shout-out from a Cruz clown.

Oh, but hey. That’s just politics … I guess.